It's business as usual for the LeftThat is practiced by folks on both the left and right, ALL THE TIME!!!
It's business as usual for the Left
If there was no crime, he couldn't really obstruct justice now, could he? Why was there no prosecution of the actual leaker?
If there was no crime, he couldn't really obstruct justice now, could he? Why was there no prosecution of the actual leaker?
Excellent question.... but don't expect a response.
Do you really think justice is ever served, hmm?
Collins, a former Washington Post reporter, said jurors wanted to hear from others involved in the case, including Bush political adviser Karl Rove, who was one of two sources for the original leak. Defense attorneys originally said both Libby and Cheney would be witnesses, and Rove was on the potential witness list.
“I will say there was a tremendous amount of sympathy for Mr. Libby on the jury. It was said a number of times, ‘What are we doing with this guy here? Where’s Rove? Where are these other guys?”’ Collins said. “I’m not saying we didn’t think Mr. Libby was guilty of the things we found him guilty of. It seemed like he was, as Mr. Wells put it, he was the fall guy.”
Jury convicts Libby on four charges - politics | NBC News
Rove wasn't there because there was no proof he did anything. So yes, in this case justice was served, at least as far as Rove goes. Libby, not so much.
Libby got screwed because the prosecutor couldn't justify all that time and money without some results to please his masters.
The right, not so much, but it's "codified" in Alinsky's writings of which there are no shortage of followers on the leftAnd right. Stop patronizing.
Obviously, a jury which heard the entire fourteen day trial, which you did not, disagrees with you. At any rate, that criminal was convicted. The failure of justice was Rove and Cheney's absence in the court room as pointed out by at least one juror, Libby was guilty, but was the fall guy for those two pos's that walked.
Lol. You just ignored and dismissed the jury who actually attended the fourteen days of trial and convicted Libby on four felonies. Your just another patronizing neo-con.
Lol. You just ignored and dismissed the jury who actually attended the fourteen days of trial and convicted Libby on four felonies. Your just another patronizing neo-con.
He was taking artistic liberty. He might of said instead "The CIA is just having its way" instead of "reining supreme"...
But that's not at all what he claimed. He claimed the MIC was reigning over the US. That's pathetic idiocy.
I would say the jury was duped noting that juries are not allowed all of the information in many cases
Typical partisan liberal.
Resort to name calling as soon as you realize you are losing the debate.
You're dismissed.
The jury also didn't hear how Judith Miller's claim that Fitzgerald withheld information from the jury.
Are you suggesting that Ike was being pathetically idiotic in warning the country to beware the MIC?
That was his point indeed. To expose the dangers of an all too big and powerful MIC that would have the power to influence USFP as we have seen. Imagine what he would think today about news medias own investments in defense contractors. IOW, it's here, Ike's worries.
Are you suggesting that Ike was being pathetically idiotic in warning the country to beware the MIC?
I think that you're dismissal of the jury's conclusion means that you are the one who must be dismissed, hear?
Did Ike claim the MIC was reigning over the country? No, he didn't. So lets not compare Ike with nutjob BS.
Hint: one juror's opinion is NOT the "jury's conclusion".
No he did not use those words, "reigning over the country".
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?